Physical Activity Questionnaires for Adults
Top Cited Papers
- 1 July 2010
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in Sports Medicine
- Vol. 40 (7), 565-600
- https://doi.org/10.2165/11531930-000000000-00000
Abstract
Many questionnaires have been developed to measure physical activity (PA), but an overview of the measurement properties of PA questionnaires is lacking. A summary of this information is useful for choosing the best questionnaire available. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate and compare measurement properties of self-administered questionnaires assessing PA in adults. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and SportDiscus®, using ‘exercise’, ‘physical activity’, ‘motor activity’ and ‘questionnaire’ as keywords. We included studies that evaluated the measurement properties of self-report questionnaires assessing PA. Article selection, data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. The quality and results of the studies were evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Physical Activity Questionnaires (QAPAQ) checklist. Construct validity, reliability and responsiveness were rated as positive, negative or indeterminate, depending on the methods and results. We included 85 (versions of) questionnaires. Overall, the quality of the studies assessing measurement properties of PA questionnaires was rather poor. Information on content validity was mostly lacking. Construct validity was assessed in 76 of the questionnaires, mostly by correlations with accelerometer data, maximal oxygen uptake or activity diaries. Fifty-one questionnaires were tested for reliability. Only a few questionnaires had sufficient construct validity and reliability, but these need to be further validated. Responsiveness was studied for only two questionnaires and was poor. There is a clear lack of standardization of PA questionnaires, resulting in many variations of questionnaires. No questionnaire or type of questionnaire for assessing PA was superior and therefore could not be strongly recommended above others. In the future, more attention should be paid to the methodology of studies assessing measurement properties of PA questionnaires and the quality of reporting.Keywords
This publication has 107 references indexed in Scilit:
- Qualitative Attributes and Measurement Properties of Physical Activity QuestionnairesSports Medicine, 2010
- Physical Activity Questionnaire ComprehensionMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 2009
- Reliability and validity of a modified self‐administered version of the Active Australia physical activity survey in a sample of mid‐age womenAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 2008
- Reliability and validity of the international physical activity questionnaire in the Nord-Trøndelag health study (HUNT) population of menBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2008
- Measuring physical activity in field studies: Comparison of a questionnaire, 24-hour recall and an accelerometerEuropean Journal of Sport Science, 2007
- Traditional Physical Activity Indexes Derived from the Harvard Alumni Activity Survey Have Low Construct Validity in a Lower Income, Urban PopulationJournal of Urban Health, 2007
- Reliability and validity of self-reported physical activity in the Nord-Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT 2)European Journal of Epidemiology, 2007
- An adapted version of the long International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-L): construct validity in a low-income, multiethnic population study from Oslo, NorwayInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 2007
- International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and New Zealand Physical Activity Questionnaire (NZPAQ): A doubly labelled water validationInternational Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 2007
- Validity and Reliability of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire in College StudentsAmerican Journal of Health Education, 2006